Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

businesswire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 211 posts

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#61

Post by nerfhammer »

tptacek wrote: post #53
nerfhammer wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people do not own smartphones. So the majority of customers don't need a large upfront investment to get a portable phone.

That's a good point. Thanks. But featurephones are also subsidized, aren't they?

Yes. They're usually free on a contract.

Not that they're that expensive new. But if portability was easy there would even be an omnipresent resale market for used phones, so even boring phones retain resale value, as is common in other countries.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#62

Post by sandipc »

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #59
cletus wrote: post #30

It's a natural fit for AT&T to buy T-Mobile. They both 3G GSM (UMTS) technology. T-Mobile is probably better in some key markets than AT&T, most notably New York (City). The one issue with T-Mobile is it uses the fairly nonstandard 1870 MHz frequency. I don't know of any other carrier that does (anywhere). I assume this is because AT&T has the rights to the more common frequencies in the relevant markets? I wonder wh…

> Wireless really is a mess in the US. Europe and Australia have really benefited from choosing one technology (GSM). How are pricing plans in the US when you are roaming beyond your state? I live in Sweden, where I have a decently priced data and call plan. However, as soon as I go outside of Sweden, which is a small country (9M people), I have to pay roaming charges. I don't mind so much the call charges, but they…

These days, cell phone plans in the US are generally national plans with no domestic roaming charges between states or regions. International roaming still hurts though.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#63

Post by joe_the_user »

Marvelous...

We have a company leveraging their government-granted-duopoly in the broadband marketplace to strengthen its market share in a closely related market (mobile phones). It's a good move for them ... They're stretching their net and once it's across the whole Internet, get ready to pay some real rent...

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#64

Post by whakojacko »

tptacek wrote: post #31
nerfhammer wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

20 cent text messages both ways is competitive?

So, buy a Sprint phone with unlimited texting? (Wait a minute; I don't appear to be paying $0.20 for text messages either, and I'm AT&T.)

Sprint plans with unlimited texting are still much more expensive than similar in Europe. Their 450 Minute "Everything" plan is $50/mo with a 2 year contract. That might be good for the US, but its not good relavitely speaking. Just as an example, I looked through vodafone UK's 24 month plans and I found 600 minutes and unlimited texting for the equivalent of $32 per month.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#65

Post by guan »

tptacek wrote: post #33
cletus wrote: post #30

It's a natural fit for AT&T to buy T-Mobile. They both 3G GSM (UMTS) technology. T-Mobile is probably better in some key markets than AT&T, most notably New York (City). The one issue with T-Mobile is it uses the fairly nonstandard 1870 MHz frequency. I don't know of any other carrier that does (anywhere). I assume this is because AT&T has the rights to the more common frequencies in the relevant markets? I wonder wh…

Even if you could simply swap your SIM card to swap providers in the US, the majority of customers would not suddenly become portable; people don't want to pay $500 up front for a phone, even though they're paying more down the line.

A lot of people I know don’t want to pay $500 up front for a phone, but I think there is a lot of path dependency in this. It’s a lot more common in Europe to pay $500 or even more for a smartphone. When I lived in Denmark I did that at least twice. Americans are willing to pay $500 or more for an iPad. A non-trivial number paid $600 for the first generation iPhone, although not enough for Apple to continue with that model in the US.

Even if iPads or other tablets become subsidized by carriers, my guess is that a lot of tablets will still be sold without subsidy simply because people are used to it.

Another effect of being able to simply swap SIM cards is that there will be a larger population of useful old unlocked/unlockable phones out there with expired contracts. A lot of early GSM competition in Europe was driven by smaller carriers or MVNOs who could simply send you a SIM card to put in your old phone.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#68

Post by orblivion »

epall wrote: post #8

T-Mobile customer service has consistently been one of the best customer service lines I have ever dealt with. Back when I had a Sidekick, I would routinely end up connected to a Danger employee sitting _at_ Danger HQ, helping me through teething issues on the early Sidekicks. For over five years, they have been extremely polite, helpful, and available. From what I've heard, I won't get this kind of service as an AT&…

I got T-Mobile because I refused to deal with the fustercluck that is the former SBC Wireless aka The New AT&T. Customer Service will send you to the wrong department sometimes. They keep acquiring companies and they can't coordinate them fast enough. I guess I'm going to have to move to Sprint, I don't care for the whole "doesn't know math" Verizon thing either.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#69

Post by zavulon »

I guess I don't understand how anti-trust laws work. Didn't they break up "Ma Bell" a few years ago specifically to prevent monopolies? And since then, AT&T bought Cingular, now T-Mobile, and they pretty much have a monopoly on GSM, if not on all mobile phones.

Re: AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

#70

Post by akgerber »

nerfhammer wrote: post #49
tptacek wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you could simply swap your SIM card to swap providers in the US, the majority of customers would not suddenly become portable; people don't want to pay $500 up front for a phone, even though they're paying more down the line.

Most people do not own smartphones. So the majority of customers don't need a large upfront investment to get a portable phone.

Smartphones are only getting cheaper. My smartphone is an LG Optimus V, which was $150 without a contract (but it's bound to Virgin Mobile, a prepaid carrier). By my estimation the phone is all-around better than a 3G iPhone. Obviously I probably got the phone somewhere near at-cost (considering how hard the RadioShack employees push you against buying it) but smartphones will be dirt cheap soon enough.
Post reply on HN